Defense Counsel Must Raise All Possible Issues on NJ PCR

August 16, 2010

State v. Francis Gannone, Jr., unpublished opinion, App. Div. Docket No. A-1231-07T4 (June 10, 2010) - Denial of PCR reversed. "Because defendant was entirely denied the effective assistance of counsel in pursuit of his PCR, we reverse and remand for a proper PCR hearing.... In short, defendant asserts that his PCR attorney violated the Rule because he did not communicate with him in any substantial way before the hearing, failed to advance defendant's arguments or explore other possible arguments, limited his brief to one argument that had no merit whatsoever, and even went so far as to denigrate those arguments that defendant had wanted made. The State's brief does not even cite or discuss the Rule, relying instead on a Strickland analysis. As noted, Strickland is irrelevant in this context. The only question is whether defendant received the services to which he was entitled under the Rule. Unquestionably, he did not."